Child sexual abuse in India

Child Sexual Abuse is a major problem in India, as it is in most countries. This page is a compilation of statistics and major incidents and policy developments around the issue of Child Sexual Abuse in India.

Overview

Surveys indicate that a large number of children in India are sexually abused by known persons like relatives, neighbors, at school, and in residential facilities for vulnerable children.

The government has failed to prevent much of the child sexual abuse from taking place. Additionally, the existing systems of child protection and the stakeholders involved including police, lawyers, media, teachers, parents etc. are simply not doing enough to help victims or to ensure that perpetrators are punished.

Most cases go unreported. Poor awareness, social stigma, and negligence remain attached to the issue. There is a culture of silence around it.

A government appointed committee, in January, found that the government’s child protection schemes, “have clearly failed to achieve their avowed objective.” ^[1]

A statement released by Louis-Georges Arsenault, UNICEF Representative to India states, “It is alarming that too many of these cases are children. One in three rape victims is a child. More than 7,200 children including infants are raped every year; experts believe that many more cases go unreported. Given the stigma attached to rapes, especially when it comes to children, this is most likely only the tip of the iceberg.”^[2]

Definition of Child Sexual Abuse In India

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, drafted to effectively address sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children, defines different forms of sexual abuse, as listed below:

Penetrative sexual assault

inserting any object or using any part of body to cause penetration into any part of the body of the child or making the child do so.

Sexual assault without penetration

touching penis, vagina, anus, breast of a child with sexual intent
making physical contact to child with sexual intent or making the child do so.

Sexual harassment

making any sound or gesture or exhibiting any object or part of body, with sexual intent, so that it will be heard or seen by the child
making a child exhibit his body or make a gesture son that it is seen by the child or other person with sexual intent.
constantly following or watching child either directly or through digital or any other means with sexual intent
showing any object to child in any form with sexual intent or enticing child for pornographic purposes.

The law deems a sexual assault to be “aggravated” under certain circumstances, such as when the abused child is mentally ill or when the abuse is committed by a person in a position of trust or authority vis-a-vis the child, like a family member, police officer, teacher, or doctor.^[3]

Child Sexual Abuse Laws in India

Further information: Child sexual abuse laws in India

Surveys & Statistics on Child Sexual Abuse in India

1998

The Indian NGO Recovery and Healing from Incest (RAHI) conducted India's first study of child sexual abuse. It surveyed 600 English-speaking middle and upper-class women, 76 percent of whom said they had been abused in childhood or adolescence, 40 percent by at least one family member, most commonly an uncle or cousin.^[4]

2006

Tulir-CPHCSA`s study in 2006,conducted among 2211 school going children in Chennai,indicates a CSA prevalence rate of 42%.Children of all socio-economic groups were found to be equally vulnerable.while 48% of boys reported having been abused,the prevalence rate among girls was 39%.15 % of both the boys and girls were severely abused ^[5]

2007

The Indian government backed a survey of 125000 children in Thirteen states. Of the children interviewed, more than half (53%) said that they had been subjected to one or more forms of sexual abuse. Over 20% of those interviewed said they were subjected to severe forms of abuse. Of those who said they were sexually abused, 57% were boys.^[6]

Prominent Cases

Before POCSO

Mathura Rape Case

The Mathura rape case was an incident of custodial rape in India on 26 March 1972, wherein Mathura, a tribal girl who was a minor at the time, was allegedly raped by two policemen on the compound of Desai Ganj Police Station in Chandrapur district of Maharashtra. After the Supreme Court acquitted the accused, there was public outcry and protests, which eventually led to amendments in Indian rape law via The Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Act 1983 (No. 46)

Bharwada Bhoginbhai Hirjibhai v. State of Gujarat 1983 ^[7]

The accused, a middle aged man had confined 2 friends of his daughter aged around 10, who had come to his house to meet the daughter, and had raped them.The trial court convicted the accused for rape, violating modesty and wrongful confinement. The High Court upheld conviction while reducing the charge from rape to attempt to rape. The Supreme Court upheld the judgement of the trial court on the ground that minor discrepancies in the evidence were not relevant. The Court further remarked that corroboration for conviction in rape cases is not necessary. This judgement was relied on in later judgments to secure conviction when they were no other eyewitnesses to support evidence given by the victim.

State of Punjab Vs. Gurmit Singh 1996 ^[8]

In this case, the Supreme Court was highly critical of the acquittal of persons accused of gang-raping a 16-year-old girl. The trial court had referred to the young village girl as a person of loose character who had invented the story of rape to justify spending a night out of home. It had refused to rely on her statement. The Supreme Court observed that the appreciation of evidence by the trial court was “not only unreasonable but perverse”. It held that: “The testimony of the victim in such cases is vital and unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate looking for corroboration of her statement, the courts should find no difficulty to act on the testimony of a victim of sexual assault alone to convict an accused where her testimony inspires confidence and is found to be reliable. Seeking corroboration of her statement before relying upon the same, as a rule, in such cases amounts to adding insult to injury.”

Sakshi Vs. Union of India 2004 ^[9]

The NGO Sakshi filed a writ petition in Public Interest to broaden the definition of rape in cases involving children where the child is abused by insertion of objects into the vagina or insertion of the male organ into body parts such as anus or mouth. The Supreme Court rejected the Plea & dismissed the PIL. But it issued valuable guidelines for trial of rape and sexual abuse which concern children. These are known as the Sakshi guidelines:-

A screen or an arrangement where victim or witnesses do not see the body or face of the accused.
Questions put in cross examination on behalf of accused, if they relate directly to the incident, must be given in writing to the Presiding Officer of the court who may put them to the victim/witnessed in a language that is clear and not embarrassing.
Victims of child abuse or rape should be allowed sufficient breaks as and when required during the testimony.

Anchorage Case 2006 ^[10]

Duncan Grant, a charity worker and UK citizen, had set up Anchorage shelter in Colaba, Mumbai, in 1995. Allan Waters, another UK citizen, was a visitor to the home. The pair were charged in 2001 with sexual assault after five boys complained to the police about repeated sexual and physical abuse by the men. They were acquitted by the High Court in Mumbai in 2008 for lack of evidence. But the Supreme Court overturned that decision and upheld guilty verdicts from the trial court in 2006 which sentenced the men to six years.

After POCSO

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 received the President’s assent on 19 June 2012 and was notified in the Gazette of India on 20 June 2012. The Act is due to come into force shortly, along with the rules being framed under the Act.^[11]

State of Maharashtra Vs. Dattatraya

Accused was found guilty under POCSO and awarded the death penalty. Accused was neighbor of the victim, age 5 years. He took the victim to his house forcibly had vaginal & anal sex, caused her head injuries and smothered her as a result of which she died.^[12]

Sarath Chandra Pottala V. Union of India

Petitioner challenged the constitutional validity of POCSO on the grounds that if a question arises over the age of the accused, the Special Court has the power to determine the same. However it has no power to seek determination of the age of the victim if there is a dispute regarding it. The petition was dismissed in view of article 15 (3) of constitution and beneficial nature of POCSO.^[13]

References

External links

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Saturday, November 14, 2015. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.